How to DM AND play char.?

Aside from the posters saying DMPC's aren't a good idea (whom I largely agree with), another reason to not run character and a game at the same time is, its really not that much fun. You're not going to get the same charge you get playing a character if you're also running the game. You already know the module, so there's no fear of the unknown, no sense of exploration. And you don't really get to role-play the character since you're busy running the game. Running a character with the group basically reduces the playing of that character to just making attack rolls.

That doesn't mean you can't include NPC's with the party, it just means that in general, running the NPC's that are with the party shouldn't take the focus off the PC's or the other parts of the game. The GM is already controlling the bad guys and running the game, you've got a pretty full plate. You don't want anything that's going to distract you from that.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I've never had a bad DMPC experience, but I don't see it working out for you. DMPCs are good when they're buffers or meatshields, but if you like playing the face character forget about it. Either just channel your rp energy into real NPCs or force your group to alternate DMs, or better yet alternate campaigns.
 

In most cases, a DM could spend the time making the game better rather than worrying about his DMPC.

But if you must have one, he must be a background character that is still effective when called upon and yet never better than any other PC.
 

The biggest strike against the DMPC isn't abuse, it's that they aren't really that fun to play. You'd be better served getting somebody to alternate DMing with you and focusing on what makes running the game fun when it's your turn behind the screen.
 

I ran a DMPC once, more as a plot device than anything. Since the party needed a rogue, I made him one. He was kinda scatterbrained though. Never seemed to remember to look for traps unless the party reminded him. :p

Anyway, he was interesting and useful, but not really much fun. I've seen DMPCs run well and I've seen them run 'meh' (mine included). Can't say I've ever seen one that was destructive to the game, but I play with a very experienced group. The active DMs have an average of 17 years under their belts.
 

MY suggestion would be to look into Troupe-style gaming. But basically that boils down to everyone taking turn as the DM, and while DM you don't have a character.
 

There's a book called Mythic by Tom Pigeon that might help you.
It has some interesting ideas about how to approach your dilemma, but it will depend very much upon what type of adventure/scenario and/or campaign you wish to play.

While I've never played a DMPC as discussed here, I have been playing since the original game and the precursor games and have often found that playing what I call an "Attached NPC" or ANPC works very well for me and is a great deal of fun.

Basically an attached NPC is an NPC who is directly attached to the party and/or their on-going adventure campaign for some reason. Like the old idea of a man-at-arms in earlier additions but instead of serving one of the characters as a page, servant, or combat comrade, the ANPC is a real character who is not part of the official party membership or group or team, but is involved in similar missions/quests as the party and so naturally develops an alliance with and often works in concert with them, and often adventures or explores with them. In military terms you might think of such a character as a type of Liaison Officer, or a Warrant Officer, attached to a team for special functions. You work in the same unit, attached to the same or similar ends, but your rank and chain of command remains separate from the norm in direct team interactions. In law enforcement you might think of it as an agent for another agency or jurisdiction attached to your team to work a common case as part of a Special Task Force. You work together directly and towards a common end, but you remain in effect separate agents with your own jurisdictions and backgrounds. In medieval times you might think of Knights Hospitallers working alongside Knights Templars at some common action. I've even in the past developed small teams of three or four characters of ANPCs who operate as their own party/special missions team directly working alongside the player-character party, and these types of situations work out extremely well and are immensely fun for me to play as well.

You can play the ANPC in any number of different ways, as a Deus Ex Machina device if really neeed (though this should very, very rarely be necessary, and should never be used as an easy "escapist" plot device), as an occasional support or leveraging persona who adventures with the party only on occasion when their mutual objectives overlap, or as direct support personnel (the liaison office mentioned above), someone who adventures often with the party but maintains his own agenda and ultimate purpose (for example Boromir in the Fellowship of the Ring, he was an official member of the Fellowship but his agenda was always his own, and he never really intended the real purpose of the Fellowship, he was using the Fellowship to his own end, even if just subconsciously.)

And that is the real fun of the ANPC, the ANPC can act in the party's favor, can assist them, or also be following the same or an overlapping agenda, or can even be corrupting and undermining the objectives of the party by subtle and covert means while appearing to be working in their favor.

An ANPC can also be serving a third party as a spy or infiltrator. An ANPC can also begin as an agent or ally or even a real friend of the party and later develop into something else, or can begin as a spy or agent working against the party and through the normal course of game development and human interaction morph into a true friend or ally.

The game itself, your personality, and the "fun paradigm" (do you find it more fun to play against the interest of the party, in favor of their interests, or some combination in between) of playing that character will determine how you play the ANPC. The important thing is that the ANPC shows up often enough to be a real and viable support character and not just a mere single adventure NPC or temporary gaming device. In other words the ANPC is a consistent and on-going game factor, an important one, which you as DM play, and who interacts directly and often with the real party, but always remains an outsider to some greater or lesser degree.

But as Doug hinted you do not wish the ANPC to become a Mary Sue. (Or an anti-Sue for that matter.) The ANPC should share the same dangers as the party while interacting with them, their own while not, must be open to being killed or badly injured, can be discovered out if acting as a spy or infiltrator (and that's part of the fun in such cases, can you keep the players from divining your real motives or purpose, even if that is a good one?)

An ANPC is of course to a certain extent a self-insertion into the overall party as a character, but it should also be an entirely separate character in it's own right.

That is to say it should be developed as any ordinary character, but with the guarded realization that because you as DM are playing that character it can never really be a full party member, it must always to some degree be on the outside looking in, and it should be used cautiously no matter how it is employed.

It is a sort of compromise, a sort of amalgam between a real character and a NPC, but if you keep it separated from the real party then I've found it is very possible to play such a character as a DM and really enjoy the experience without directly endangering the real party as being both character and DM. But if properly played and employed the ANPC can be a very fascinating and rich source of material for both in-game character dynamics and for out of game player development.
 
Last edited:

In my experience, the DMPC problem is overrated. The DM can play all other NPCs without trouble, so he can play a DMPC too, if he's careful.

There are a few ways to make it easier:

Don't make a leader DMPC, make a follower. It does not have to be a silent or even mute character, just one who is more apt to follow some other PC's lead than try to lead himself. Could be the carefree scoundrel who gets into trouble (which can also serve as an easy adventure hook), or the slightly bookish type who can talk for hours about a detail or history (good way to introduce more campaign knowledge to the players). Or the cohort type "I follow cleric Glendal of Tyr, having pledged my sword to Tyr".

Support characters (healers, buffers) are easier to play as DMPCs than offensive characters. If your character is primarily occupied with healing and buffing the other PCs, chances are it won't be seen as some "spotlight stealer". Another optiion is the defensive tank - a trusty fighter, build for AC, that mainly offers flanking opportunities for rogues, serves as a human shield for the casters, and otherwise opens opportunities for the rest of the PCs while not outdamaging or outshining others.

If the character has strong and known beliefs - could be a code, a religion, or even a "money comes first, laws don't matter" philosophy - it's also easier to play without "leading the party" through "DM said so through his character", since the players know how the character will generally act, and don't have to suspect DM hints in its actions.
 

DMPCs are primarily a problem when they are spellcasters or have some sort of GM knowledge that puts them in a position where they end up default leading (if a scribe who works for the noble who hired you tags along, then the PCs will automatically defer to him when dealing with their boss, for example, pretty much leaving you talking to yourself while the party stands around holding their cheese).

Using an NPC class, such as an Adept, Warrior or Expert, could go a long way towards evening out any perception of the DMPC being too powerful.

The 'rules,' as I see them;
1) Make sure the character doesn't step on any PC toes. If it's a fighter, make it weaker and less effective than the party fighters. Don't try to get around this by giving it some cool toy, like a Spiked Chain trip-build. If the party Fighter types are around 6th level, have the DMPC be 4th-ish, suitable to be a Cohort, but not a full member. Having a wizard as DMPC is the worst choice, as a wizard can easily make many other team members feel worthless with the right spell choices (out roguing the rogue with a Spider Climb or Invisibility, for instance).

2) Don't demand that Skippy the DMPC get a fair share of party treasure, or else the players will feel like you are cheating them out of a percentage of 'their' treasure (if he's not terribly effective, it will sting even more, as they will feel like they are 'carrying him' and losing a disproportionate amount of money for doing so!). He's got his own reasons to tag along with the party, and he's not a flunky, nor is he a member of the team. Maybe he just hates whatever the party is fighting. If the players aren't complete dicks, they'll be willing to give him cast-off armor, etc. and keep him outfitted somewhere near appropriate to his (appropriately lower) level. Doubleplus don't have him be on a quest for a particular valuable item and find it during the course of the adventure! Few things can start a real-life argument like hearing the words, 'Okay, Bob gets a +1 Ring of Protection, Darren gets 20 +3 arrows, Mickey gets a Dagger of Venom and my lovely wife gets a +5 Elven Longbow that shoots flaming Unicorns at people.' (Having him join the party because he wants to reclaim some family heirloom from the raiding mooglies that has no actual worth in coin, but is of great sentimental value to him or his family is okay. If his 'share' of party treasure is Grandpa DMPCs breastplate from his days in the wars, a non-masterwork breastplate with a conspicuous hole in the center of it, "Did I mention that grandpa took a ballista bolt to the chest? He was carried home on his shield..." would be less objectionable.)

3) Don't have the DMPC have access to any special information or connection to the local social structure. This may seem like the obvious introduction point for a DMPC, but it runs the risk of having the party stand around letting you talk to yourself since the DMPC Acolyte 'obviously' is the best person to talk to High Priest Wedbetter or the Town Guard who tagged along is 'obviously' the best choice to haggle with the Mayor about how much the party is gonna charge for killin' those Hobgoblins... Making the character a mute might be going to far, but having him be surly and uncommunicative, or just flat-out wrong-headed about some matters, might help ensure that he is discounted from the 'face-man' role. Never let the DMPC be 'face-man.' Bards are right out, for that reason.

4) Don't use systems, races or classes that aren't available to the PCs. If you told your players 'core only,' having the DMPC be a Thri-Kreen who uses the Psychic rules from Green Ronin's Complete Psychic Handbook might result in your being thrown out the window by your gaming group. Fair play is key, and stacking the deck in your favor isn't going to win friends and influence people at the gaming table. Even something as simple as a custom magic item or spell that the PCs don't have can really annoy some players.
 

Fenes said:
In my experience, the DMPC problem is overrated. The DM can play all other NPCs without trouble, so he can play a DMPC too, if he's careful.

There may be cases you aren't considering.

First is when it's just PCs. For instance, PCs & DMPCs in a dungeon with a riddle. If the DM "solves" the riddle the DM knows the answer to -- to the benefit of their personal PC -- that smells of cheese. If the DM is not allowed a chance at the riddle, where's the fun of running a character that the OP wants?

Along the same lines, a PC which does something heroic / pulls a great swindle / find an antique shop with a magic sword / etc is cool to the players. A DMPC doing the same ... again smells of cheese.

Really, it's really easy for the DM to be considered impartial towards their own character, which reduced other player fun, and if they pull back so much that they never get to do anything cool, they aren't having the fun PC experience the OP wants to get from a DMPC.

Another point is that a PC is often much more complex to play then other NPCs. Consider a fight. PCs usually have more wealth, which often translates to more options. Many foes in an encounter that a DM is running won't survive the encounter, but a PC needs to be played to ensure their personal survival and the survival of the rest of the team. It often takes the DM more time then a PC to make these choices, because a player has been thinking about it while other PCs and NPC go, but the DM is busy either doing NPC actions or adjudicating PC actions. So it really can slow down the game.

I've played in groups in multiple systems where DMPCs (/GMPCs) were around, and they regularly were problems in some aspect.

To turn it around, I think a DM can run an NPC that is with the party long term. It's mainly a different mindset. It's not a PC you are running, it's another NPC you are using to advance the plots. They have their own motivations, which may or may not be in sync with the usually powerful all-for-one-and-one-for-all PC party motivations that often form regardless of most PC individual motivations.

Cheers,
=Blue(23)
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top